Smoking Ban Part 2

It has been my experience that folks who have no vices have very few virtues.
Abraham Lincoln

I have to quit reading the Post Dispatch. Again, I find myself in another smoking rant. In the last week, there were two articles in the Post about smoking in the casinos. One of them related to East St. Louis, and the other was St. Louis County. In both cases, government entities wanted to get exemptions to the smoking ban for casino complexes.

Again, I do not smoke, but this really perturbs me. First, I do not think it is the governments’ business to control what goes on in privately owned establishments. If smoking is so bad for businesses, their patrons will go somewhere else; therefore, the business owners would prohibit smoking on their own premises for their own survival.

If the government is so adamant that public smoking is wrong, and they override the will of the business owners by making a law banning smoking, then it should be wrong everywhere all the time. Abraham Lincoln said, “The best way to get a bad law repealed is to enforce it strictly.” Various cities, counties and states have come up with these nonsmoking laws. They are apparently bad laws because, not long after going into law, they want exemptions for high volume (read high tax base) locations. These laws, supposedly for the protection of the people, are not so important when it causes reduced tax income. They are willing to change the law for places producing millions in taxes every year, but to Hell with the small business owner who loses business and profit. Hey, maybe small businesses will lose their patrons to the casinos, where smoking is legal. It is always so nice when the government picks the winners and the losers. Whatever happened to that “equal under the law” thing? Was that not part of some stupid government document . . . oh yes, the Constitution.

As I said, if smoking is so bad it needs to banned, outlaw it everywhere and enforce it strictly. If it is a good law, then it is worth the loss of the cigarette and the sales taxes. If it is a bad law, do not create the thing in the first place. How long before the people demand its repeal.

The United States has more than a little experience on the absolute banning of something a significant portion of the population enjoys: does prohibition ring any bells? The 19th Amendment banned liquor beginning one year after ratification on 1/16/1919. It was repealed on 12/5/1933—after being strictly enforced for only thirteen years; what does that tell you about it? I suppose the government entities, trying to modify the smoking ban to get the tax dollars, might be able to extend the smoking ban longer if is not strictly enforced; when only the little, unimportant businesses are getting hurt. What was that about unemployment?

Advertisements
Published in: on December 6, 2010 at 3:36 pm  Leave a Comment  
Tags:

The URI to TrackBack this entry is: https://stlouisooz.wordpress.com/2010/12/06/smoking-ban-part-2/trackback/

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: